Scientists show future events decide what happens in the past (GGT)

[Rukh]

What if C is actually instantaneous movement, it just seems like C because we're also moving through time and it's relative to the speed we're moving.

[Kujako]

What if C is actually instantaneous movement, it just seems like C because we're also moving through time and it's relative to the speed we're moving.

Well, we know* that while C is a constant, time is not. The passage of time varies relative to speed in relation to the observer.

*(all current evidence suggests, but we could be wrong)

[Faroth]

So basically the concept of if you can't see them, they can't see you is true?

Don't forget your towel when you travel.

[Deleted]

Don't forget your towel when you travel.

Nobody will think you are uncivlised when you got your own towel.

[Rukh]

Well, we know* that while C is a constant, time is not. The passage of time varies relative to speed in relation to the observer.

*(all current evidence suggests, but we could be wrong)

Sure, but we assume that C is some arbitrary max speed number, I wonder if we need to be taking in to account that all our observations are moving at an offset relative to time.

[Kujako]

Sure, but we assume that C is some arbitrary max speed number, I wonder if we need to be taking in to account that all our observations are moving at an offset relative to time.

This is covered in Einsteins train thought experiments.

Train is moving down the tracks at speed X. Person at the back of the train fires a laser towards the front. Person watching the train go by sees the photons from the laser moving not at C+X but at C because the passage of time changes based on the observer so that the photons don't go faster then C. Person on the train sees the photons also moving at C, meaning that for them time is moving faster then for the person watching the train go by.

[Ryme]

Hasn't this been postulated for a while now?

Yeah, quantum arrow of time or am I misunderstanding this experiment?

[Rukh]

This is covered in Einsteins train thought experiments.

Train is moving down the tracks at speed X. Person at the back of the train fires a laser towards the front. Person watching the train go by sees the photons from the laser moving not at C+X but at C because the passage of time changes based on the observer so that the photons don't go faster then C. Person on the train sees the photons also moving at C, meaning that for them time is moving faster then for the person watching the train go by.

Sure but see this is exactly my point. Maybe the laser is actually instantaneous but we see it as C because we're actually moving at Instantaneous - C speed.

- - - Updated - - -

This is covered in Einsteins train thought experiments.

Train is moving down the tracks at speed X. Person at the back of the train fires a laser towards the front. Person watching the train go by sees the photons from the laser moving not at C+X but at C because the passage of time changes based on the observer so that the photons don't go faster then C. Person on the train sees the photons also moving at C, meaning that for them time is moving faster then for the person watching the train go by.

Sure but see this is exactly my point. Maybe the laser is actually instantaneous but we see it as C because we're actually moving at Instantaneous - C speed.

[Kujako]

Sure but see this is exactly my point. Maybe the laser is actually instantaneous but we see it as C because we're actually moving at Instantaneous - C speed.

Again, time is relative. There is no such thing as instantaneous or not, it's all down to the observer. However, we have yet to find a way, practically or theoretically, where we can violate C being the speed limit. However, as with all science that is prefixed by "all current evidence suggests" and suffixed with "but we could be wrong".

[Rukh]

Again, time is relative. There is no such thing as instantaneous or not, it's all down to the observer. However, we have yet to find a way, practically or theoretically, where we can violate C being the speed limit. However, as with all science that is prefixed by "all current evidence suggests" and suffixed with "but we could be wrong".

"There is no such thing as instantanous or not"

This is untrue. According to current beliefs there is no such thing as instantaneous, nothing can travel faster than C, including information.

My point is simply that maybe C is set where its set because us (and everything we can interface with) is actually moving at a set rate, maybe there are some constants that aren't relative to us because we're moving through something else.

[endersblade]

I just farted

That's about the only thing in this thread that actually makes sense.

[nextormento]

from the photons point of view, no time has passed. As soon as it is generated it hits whatever surface it ultimately hit from our point of view. That is because photons do not experience time at all.

They don't experience anything at all
Some interpretations of that fact irk me a bit: people think that somehow these photons are in some kind of stasis until they hit something.

It easy to deliver as a factoid, but I find many people simply go "that's cool", but they don't quite get how or why that's the case.
We can point to the idea that infinite time dilation -as per special relativity- implies infinite length contraction. So when they're created, they hit whatever: because they're already there. Distance doesn't mean anything to photons either.
Some people find that a bit more enlightening, but it doesn't fully satisfy everyone. /shrug.

[Shodan30]

So who do i have to kill in the future to keep hitler from being born Science?

Huh? Huh?

[Annoying]

So: If heat death is the correct theory, does this mean that when heat death of the universe occurs, that the universe ceases to exist?

[Aeula]

There's a reason I don't like scientists, this is it.

[Aeula]

Why? I find problems interesting, because it makes me want to find an answer. Sort of like a puzzle.

They're learning too much, too quickly, there are some things I'd rather not know, nor would I want humanity to know of such things.
I don't want humanity to the perfect thing at the pinnacle of its evolution, that to me is boring. The less we evolve and learn the better.

Besides that they have some pretty ridiculous names for some of these... Whatever it is they're trying to describe.